Hello, Here is a discussion started with one [math] user. As a result, James proposed to switch development back from branch MATH_2_0 to trunk (and to switch trunk to a new 1.x branch). I agree with this suggestion but cannot be sure about how many users will be affected. Just to be sure, we should probably do a move rather than a copy as I suggested in my last message (and btw, James, it is what you really suggested in the first place, isn't it ?).
So does anybody have an opinion on this ? Luc ----- Mail transféré ----- De: "luc maisonobe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> À: "Commons Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Envoyé: Jeudi 20 Novembre 2008 16:17:01 GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Berne / Rome / Stockholm / Vienne Objet: Re: [MATH] commons math 2.0 snapshot jars ----- "James Carman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:40 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You are right. When development for 2.0 started, we were not sure > that if this would be the next version or if a 1.3 could be released > before. So we decided to use a branch for 2.0 and the trunk for 1.x. > Now it seems there will not be a 1.3 release and the next version will > be 2.0, so it would be more straightforward to have 2.0 be the trunk, > I agree. I don't think we will switch branch/trunk at this > intermediate state. We will more probably finish work on 2.0 and put > it back to trunk at release time. > > > > Why the reluctance to switch? With SVN, it's extremely easy to move > stuff around. If "current" development is going on within the 2.0 > branch, then it should probably be the trunk. Just move trunk to a > release-1-maintenance branch or something and move the 2.0 branch to > trunk. Yes, I know, its only two "svn copy" commands. The rationale for me was mainly that it was decided some months ago to work on this branch and this is now known by several users. This was one of the reasons why when I fixed an issue in Jira, I always added the version numer and the branch of the correction, i.e. MATH_2_0. As both of you voiced against this situation and your proposal is sound, I'll propose the switch on the dev list. Luc > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
